COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	6 Months Ended
Jan. 31, 2012
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES From time to time, the Company may become party to various legal proceedings and claims, either asserted or unasserted, which arise in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company currently does not believe that the outcome of any of these claims or any of the legal matters mentioned elsewhere in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flow. The Company expenses legal fees as incurred. New York state excise tax - On January 6, 2012, the Company received a notice from the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance (the “Department”) stating that the Department was assessing the Company draft assessments of $10.5 million based almost entirely on estimates and assumptions that an excise tax was due on 100% of the Company's New York state revenues for the calendar year ended December 31, 2000 through the calendar year ended December 31, 2009. The Company believes that the calculation of the assessment is materially flawed and intends to contest it. The Company believes that any possible reasonable assessment will not be material to the Company. The Company establishes liabilities when a particular contingency is probable and estimable. The Company believes an assessment is reasonably possible; however, the reasonably possible exposure to losses cannot currently be estimated at this time. Litigation j2 - In June 2008, j2 Global Communications, Inc. (“j2”) brought a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company, alleging that the Company infringes three of j2's patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 6,597,688, 7,020,132 and 6,208,638 and seeking damages and injunctive relief. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and is currently in the discovery phase. The Company has denied infringing any of the j2 patents and has filed a counterclaim seeking a declaratory judgment that the j2 patents are invalid. Discovery in the matter is ongoing. The case is currently scheduled for trial in November 2012. j2 attempted in the above-mentioned lawsuit to add an additional allegation of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,350,066, which the Court denied. Thereafter, in May 2011, j2's wholly-owned subsidiary Advanced Messaging Technologies Inc. (“AMT”) brought a new patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging that the Company infringes U.S. Patent No. 6,350,066. AMT seeks an injunction, royalties and damages. The Company has denied infringing the AMT patent and has filed a counterclaim seeking a declaratory judgment that the AMT patent is invalid. Discovery in the matter is ongoing. The case is currently scheduled for trial in March 2013. The Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the j2 and AMT allegations and because they are at various stages of defenses, the ultimate outcome or range of outcomes is not yet determinable. In March 2011, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit against j2. The suit, filed by the Company's subsidiary Xpedite Systems, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, alleges that j2 infringes U.S. Patent No. 5,872,640 entitled "Facsimile Form Generation System" and U.S. Patent No. 7,804,823 entitled "Systems and Methods for Communicating Documents Via an Autonomous Multi-Function Peripheral Device." The Company is seeking monetary damages for past infringement, and injunctive relief prohibiting j2 from continuing to infringe the patents, among other remedies. New York state sales tax - As a result of a New York state sales tax audit completed in 2005 of EasyLink Services International, Inc., a dissolved subsidiary of EasyLink Services Corporation, EasyLink Services International, Inc. was assessed approximately $0.5 million in tax, interest, and penalties on sales for the sales tax period beginning March 1, 2001 and ending May 31, 2004. EasyLink Services International, Inc. appealed the assessment administratively to the New York Division of Tax Appeals, which resulted in an opinion in 2008 in favor of EasyLink Services International, Inc. In late July 2009, after appeal by the New York Department of Taxation and Finance, the decision was reversed by the administrative New York Tax Appeals Tribunal and remanded back to the administrative law judge to determine allocation and penalty issues. On remand, the Administrative Law Judge upheld the Tax Department's position on the allocation issues but agreed with EasyLink on the penalty issues and cancelled all penalties. The administrative proceedings are exhausted. EasyLink is currently pursuing a judicial appeal of the July 2009 decision of the Tax Appeals Tribunal by posting a bond and filing a Notice of Petition with the New York State Appellate Division in Albany, New York. Retarus, Inc. - In June 2011, the Company and its subsidiary Xpedite Systems LLC filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, against Retarus, Inc., Donna Tomasino, Francis Toscano and Timothy Valentine asserting claims against Retarus, Inc. for unfair competition, tortious interference with contract, aiding and abetting a breach of duty of loyalty and trust and unjust enrichment, and requesting monetary damages against Retarus, Inc. and injunctive relief against Retarus, Inc., Donna Tomasino, Francis Toscano and Timothy Valentine. On November 7, 2011 the parties to the lawsuit negotiated and executed a settlement agreement, exchanged mutual releases, and terminated the litigation. In accordance with ASC Topic 450, Contingencies, the Company believes it has adequately reserved for the contingencies arising from the legal matters described above where an outcome was deemed to be reasonably probable and the loss amount could be reasonably estimated. As such, we do not believe that the anticipated outcome of the aforementioned proceedings will have a materially adverse impact on our financial condition, cash flows, or results of operations.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

From time to time, the Company may become party to various legal proceedings and claims, either asserted or unasserted, which arise in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company currently does not believe that the outcome of any of these claims or any of the legal matters mentioned elsewhere in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flow. The Company expenses legal fees as incurred.

New York state excise tax - On January 6, 2012, the Company received a notice from the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance (the “Department”) stating that the Department was assessing the Company draft assessments of $10.5 million based almost entirely on estimates and assumptions that an excise tax was due on 100% of the Company's New York state revenues for the calendar year ended December 31, 2000 through the calendar year ended December 31, 2009. The Company believes that the calculation of the assessment is materially flawed and intends to contest it. The Company believes that any possible reasonable assessment will not be material to the Company. The Company establishes liabilities when a particular contingency is probable and estimable. The Company believes an assessment is reasonably possible; however, the reasonably possible exposure to losses cannot currently be estimated at this time.

Litigation

j2 - In June 2008, j2 Global Communications, Inc. (“j2”) brought a patent infringement lawsuit against the Company, alleging that the Company infringes three of j2's patents, U.S. Patent Nos. 6,597,688, 7,020,132 and 6,208,638 and seeking damages and injunctive relief. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and is currently in the discovery phase. The Company has denied infringing any of the j2 patents and has filed a counterclaim seeking a declaratory judgment that the j2 patents are invalid. Discovery in the matter is ongoing. The case is currently scheduled for trial in November 2012.

j2 attempted in the above-mentioned lawsuit to add an additional allegation of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,350,066, which the Court denied. Thereafter, in May 2011, j2's wholly-owned subsidiary Advanced Messaging Technologies Inc. (“AMT”) brought a new patent infringement lawsuit against the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging that the Company infringes U.S. Patent No. 6,350,066. AMT seeks an injunction, royalties and damages. The Company has denied infringing the AMT patent and has filed a counterclaim seeking a declaratory judgment that the AMT patent is invalid. Discovery in the matter is ongoing. The case is currently scheduled for trial in March 2013.

The Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the j2 and AMT allegations and because they are at various stages of defenses, the ultimate outcome or range of outcomes is not yet determinable.

In March 2011, the Company filed a patent infringement lawsuit against j2. The suit, filed by the Company's subsidiary Xpedite Systems, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, alleges that j2 infringes U.S. Patent No. 5,872,640 entitled "Facsimile Form Generation System" and U.S. Patent No. 7,804,823 entitled "Systems and Methods for Communicating Documents Via an Autonomous Multi-Function Peripheral Device." The Company is seeking monetary damages for past infringement, and injunctive relief prohibiting j2 from continuing to infringe the patents, among other remedies.

New York state sales tax - As a result of a New York state sales tax audit completed in 2005 of EasyLink Services International, Inc., a dissolved subsidiary of EasyLink Services Corporation, EasyLink Services International, Inc. was assessed approximately $0.5 million in tax, interest, and penalties on sales for the sales tax period beginning March 1, 2001 and ending May 31, 2004. EasyLink Services International, Inc. appealed the assessment administratively to the New York Division of Tax Appeals, which resulted in an opinion in 2008 in favor of EasyLink Services International, Inc. In late July 2009, after appeal by the New York Department of Taxation and Finance, the decision was reversed by the administrative New York Tax Appeals Tribunal and remanded back to the administrative law judge to determine allocation and penalty issues. On remand, the Administrative Law Judge upheld the Tax Department's position on the allocation issues but agreed with EasyLink on the penalty issues and cancelled all penalties. The administrative proceedings are exhausted. EasyLink is currently pursuing a judicial appeal of the July 2009 decision of the Tax Appeals Tribunal by posting a bond and filing a Notice of Petition with the New York State Appellate Division in Albany, New York.

Retarus, Inc. - In June 2011, the Company and its subsidiary Xpedite Systems LLC filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, against Retarus, Inc., Donna Tomasino, Francis Toscano and Timothy Valentine asserting claims against Retarus, Inc. for unfair competition, tortious interference with contract, aiding and abetting a breach of duty of loyalty and trust and unjust enrichment, and requesting monetary damages against Retarus, Inc. and injunctive relief against Retarus, Inc., Donna Tomasino, Francis Toscano and Timothy Valentine. On November 7, 2011 the parties to the lawsuit negotiated and executed a settlement agreement, exchanged mutual releases, and terminated the litigation.

In accordance with ASC Topic 450, Contingencies, the Company believes it has adequately reserved for the contingencies arising from the legal matters described above where an outcome was deemed to be reasonably probable and the loss amount could be reasonably estimated. As such, we do not believe that the anticipated outcome of the aforementioned proceedings will have a materially adverse impact on our financial condition, cash flows, or results of operations.